|
Post by rickyqpr on May 27, 2019 10:08:33 GMT
Late goals are a real killer. Charlton's yesterday was as late as our Bobby's goal. A quickly taken free kick caught out Sunderland. No love for Sunderland but their friends had traveled down for yet another 'final', only to lose like that. Tough stuff. But the Charlton own goal right at the start was simply amazing - a Wembley play-off and that happens - a simple back pass with no opposition in sight, goalkeeper not looking - presumably nerves played a big part. Hard to come back from that, but they did. Charlton keeper the most relieved man in London yesterday! But today the Derby fans venture down for yet another torture. I can only imaging what the Zamora moment felt like to those guys. Had some Derby fans on the tube home after the game and they were just thunder struck. I hope they beat Villa today though.
|
|
|
Post by rousdonhoop on May 27, 2019 10:33:55 GMT
terrible way to lose, fantastic if you win though (he he). Derby for me too
|
|
|
Post by Marc on May 27, 2019 12:21:26 GMT
Charlton's was even later than our Bobby's, his was just about in normal time so we had to endure a tense few minutes of injury time. Charlton's 94th minute is the way to do it, minimal opportunity for a response.
Derby for me as well.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 27, 2019 12:56:22 GMT
Quite a few play-off players seem to be out of contact. Presumably, they are waiting to see which division they will be playing in before exercising their option(s). Dan Butler had a very good final for Newport and has been their player of the year for the last 2 season. Put in some handy crosses from left back and at 24 would be a decent gamble. He would not get so much time in the Championship, but too good for the 4th tier. Trouble is he has played all his football in the West Country & Wales and would probably find London pretty costly. The other problem is that plenty will have seen his performance and will present more attractive options than QPR. It is being so positive that keeps me going LOL en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Butler_(footballer)
|
|
|
Play-offs
May 27, 2019 14:22:19 GMT
via mobile
Post by nomar on May 27, 2019 14:22:19 GMT
Is Grealish the most overrated player in this League?
He's good but I think Eze has more raw talent. Grealish has the better footballing brain at this stage, though.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 27, 2019 14:56:14 GMT
Is Grealish the most overrated player in this League? He's good but I think Eze has more raw talent. Grealish has the better footballing brain at this stage, though. Taking too long on the ball for sure. Villa deservedly in front (sadly). Derby are hardly playing to their own strengths - especially with their starting eleven. I suppose that if Frank changes it and they improve in the second half it will be another master stroke. However, unless he does change it, they are going to playing us at Loftus Road again next season.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 27, 2019 15:56:42 GMT
Got to say - Lampard messed that up. When Waghorn and Marriott came on they were a different side, but by then they were 2 down. 7 minutes added on - injury to Mings, the rest for the trademark championship time wasting. Good to see it added on, but bloody annoying all the same. Pray that next season that the officials will be consistent regarding time wasting - but who am I kidding?
|
|
|
Post by bristolpete on May 27, 2019 16:15:42 GMT
There was a suggestion that timekeeping be taken out of the hands of the ref and the clock be stopped all the time the ball is out of play (as in rugby)? FIFA decided it was not worth pursuing. Why?
|
|
|
Post by terryb on May 27, 2019 16:41:05 GMT
There was a suggestion that timekeeping be taken out of the hands of the ref and the clock be stopped all the time the ball is out of play (as in rugby)? FIFA decided it was not worth pursuing. Why? That would result in the game lasting a minimum of 60 minutes per half! I don't think many fans would be happy with that. It would definitely mean I couldn't go to midweek matches as I would miss the train home!
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 27, 2019 18:30:49 GMT
Derby are going to have to spend big again next season. Perhaps they will sell their training ground next. The following will be out of contract / return to parent: Ambrose, Bryson, Cole, King, Mount, Nugent Olsson, Roos, Tomori & Wilson. Will not be cheap to replace. It is not just the huge cash windfall of winning a play-off, with the loan system the way it is, teams really bet the shop to reach the top flight. Miss out and then it is start all over again building a new team. Would not be surprised though if it is not Frank lampard's Derby County by next season.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 27, 2019 18:34:35 GMT
There was a suggestion that timekeeping be taken out of the hands of the ref and the clock be stopped all the time the ball is out of play (as in rugby)? FIFA decided it was not worth pursuing. Why? That would result in the game lasting a minimum of 60 minutes per half! I don't think many fans would be happy with that. It would definitely mean I couldn't go to midweek matches as I would miss the train home! The officials need to get together pre-season and make a policy to clamp down on it. Book the keeper after one warning (and that includes Lumley!), book the captain if the team takes the p+ss - warn him and then book him - he will not want to get a suspension through it. It has to be more of a deterrent.
|
|
|
Post by harr on May 27, 2019 19:08:23 GMT
Bad luck for Cheloram, maybe next year. I thought Derby were very poor in the first half, only got starting playing when they were behind but they had a good season from Lampard.
|
|
|
Post by Marc on May 27, 2019 20:14:19 GMT
There was a suggestion that timekeeping be taken out of the hands of the ref and the clock be stopped all the time the ball is out of play (as in rugby)? FIFA decided it was not worth pursuing. Why? That would result in the game lasting a minimum of 60 minutes per half! I don't think many fans would be happy with that. It would definitely mean I couldn't go to midweek matches as I would miss the train home! As a Rugby League fan, I can tell you that stopping the clock adds only a few minutes to each half, probably not much more than is added on now if anything at all. That said, it's nothing compared to what keeping the ball in the corner does to the game!
|
|
|
Post by terryb on May 27, 2019 21:13:02 GMT
That would result in the game lasting a minimum of 60 minutes per half! I don't think many fans would be happy with that. It would definitely mean I couldn't go to midweek matches as I would miss the train home! As a Rugby League fan, I can tell you that stopping the clock adds only a few minutes to each half, probably not much more than is added on now if anything at all. That said, it's nothing compared to what keeping the ball in the corner does to the game! Keeping the ball in the corner is not time wasting as the ball is in play. Time wasting can only occur when the gamne is stopped. It may not be entertaining,. but it is legitimate. I wasn't joking about an hour per half! I'm sure that statistically the ball is not in play for more than sixty minutes per match. That is, umless my memory has failed me again! Add up the time that the ball isn't in play for goal kicks, corners, throw ins, free kicks etc & I think you will be amazed. Many a time I have flicked between Super League & European football on a Thursday night & I can't remember one time when the forty minutes of Rugby League didn't take longer than the forty five minutes of football. This is possibly due to referrals upstairs & may change when VAR is in use. I also think you will be surprised how much time in RL is used up for kicks at goal, scrums & playing the ball etc. I know they have introduced time limits this season on scrums after they have restarted the clock, but sides use up every one of those seconds before playing the ball. At least the authorities are trying to speed up the game though & to keep the ball in play longer. Not that that is helping Wakefield recently! Don't get me started on Rugby Union! The time wasted on line outs, scrums, penalties is incredible & I think a kicker at goal is alloweed ninety seconds after placing the ball! Then we come to how long a game of American Football lasts as the watch is stopped at the end of many plays. Certainly the officials in football should take action to reduce the time taken in re-starting the game, but an off the pitch timekeeper stopping the clock every time the ball is dead is not the answer.
|
|
|
Post by Marc on May 27, 2019 21:31:54 GMT
As a Rugby League fan, I can tell you that stopping the clock adds only a few minutes to each half, probably not much more than is added on now if anything at all. That said, it's nothing compared to what keeping the ball in the corner does to the game! Keeping the ball in the corner is not time wasting as the ball is in play. Time wasting can only occur when the gamne is stopped. It may not be entertaining,. but it is legitimate. I wasn't joking about an hour per half! I'm sure that statistically the ball is not in play for more than sixty minutes per match. That is, umless my memory has failed me again! Add up the time that the ball isn't in play for goal kicks, corners, throw ins, free kicks etc & I think you will be amazed. Many a time I have flicked between Super League & European football on a Thursday night & I can't remember one time when the forty minutes of Rugby League didn't take longer than the forty five minutes of football. This is possibly due to referrals upstairs & may change when VAR is in use. I also think you will be surprised how much time in RL is used up for kicks at goal, scrums & playing the ball etc. I know they have introduced time limits this season on scrums after they have restarted the clock, but sides use up every one of those seconds before playing the ball. At least the authorities are trying to speed up the game though & to keep the ball in play longer. Not that that is helping Wakefield recently! Don't get me started on Rugby Union! The time wasted on line outs, scrums, penalties is incredible & I think a kicker at goal is alloweed ninety seconds after placing the ball! Then we come to how long a game of American Football lasts as the watch is stopped at the end of many plays. Certainly the officials in football should take action to reduce the time taken in re-starting the game, but an off the pitch timekeeper stopping the clock every time the ball is dead is not the answer. I know ball in the corner isn't officially time wasting, it just really ruins a game for me. If you watch a Superleague game, you'll see that it kicks off at 7.45 and is done by 9.35. Once you take off the 15 minutes for half time, that's 1 hour 35 minutes and that's including video ref referrals. I was actually at a televised game last weekend and it really doesn't last too long. They don't stop the clock unless the game is going to be stopped for more than just a few seconds. I'm not suggesting that they stop the clock for every corner, throw in etc, that would be silly but stopping it for deliberate time wasting could go a long way to combatting it.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on May 28, 2019 9:03:40 GMT
Keeping the ball in the corner is not time wasting as the ball is in play. Time wasting can only occur when the gamne is stopped. It may not be entertaining,. but it is legitimate. I wasn't joking about an hour per half! I'm sure that statistically the ball is not in play for more than sixty minutes per match. That is, umless my memory has failed me again! Add up the time that the ball isn't in play for goal kicks, corners, throw ins, free kicks etc & I think you will be amazed. Many a time I have flicked between Super League & European football on a Thursday night & I can't remember one time when the forty minutes of Rugby League didn't take longer than the forty five minutes of football. This is possibly due to referrals upstairs & may change when VAR is in use. I also think you will be surprised how much time in RL is used up for kicks at goal, scrums & playing the ball etc. I know they have introduced time limits this season on scrums after they have restarted the clock, but sides use up every one of those seconds before playing the ball. At least the authorities are trying to speed up the game though & to keep the ball in play longer. Not that that is helping Wakefield recently! Don't get me started on Rugby Union! The time wasted on line outs, scrums, penalties is incredible & I think a kicker at goal is alloweed ninety seconds after placing the ball! Then we come to how long a game of American Football lasts as the watch is stopped at the end of many plays. Certainly the officials in football should take action to reduce the time taken in re-starting the game, but an off the pitch timekeeper stopping the clock every time the ball is dead is not the answer. I know ball in the corner isn't officially time wasting, it just really ruins a game for me. If you watch a Superleague game, you'll see that it kicks off at 7.45 and is done by 9.35. Once you take off the 15 minutes for half time, that's 1 hour 35 minutes and that's including video ref referrals. I was actually at a televised game last weekend and it really doesn't last too long. They don't stop the clock unless the game is going to be stopped for more than just a few seconds. I'm not suggesting that they stop the clock for every corner, throw in etc, that would be silly but stopping it for deliberate time wasting could go a long way to combatting it. I agree in the main Marc, but the original question sugested that the timekeeper would stop the clock every time the ball was out of play. That is why I don't think it would be agreeable & the match would last at least two hours!
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 28, 2019 9:08:40 GMT
I think we would all be happy with consistency and that needs to be an edit from the top. I believe (but never sure) that when the 4th official puts up the board that the time shown includes the time added on for time wasting. I say I am not sure because some do not seem to add any on but others bang it on - usually when we have been time wasting. The ref takes the board as the minimum he should add on. Those added minutes are often consumed by more time wasting, but how often does the ref add anything beyond the board figure? If he does, then the crowd start whistling heaping on the pressure - and most just call it off. In short, the board is a complete lottery unless their has been a long injury. Yesterday, I did not expect to see 7 on the board. The Mings injury was as Derby pulled a goal back, watching I thought that the momentum was lost and I doubted Derby would be compensated. My point being that you just never know. As for corner flag clock running down, I hate it when we do it. You just know it will be a throw on to the opposition.
|
|
|
Post by Marc on May 28, 2019 11:41:22 GMT
I know ball in the corner isn't officially time wasting, it just really ruins a game for me. If you watch a Superleague game, you'll see that it kicks off at 7.45 and is done by 9.35. Once you take off the 15 minutes for half time, that's 1 hour 35 minutes and that's including video ref referrals. I was actually at a televised game last weekend and it really doesn't last too long. They don't stop the clock unless the game is going to be stopped for more than just a few seconds. I'm not suggesting that they stop the clock for every corner, throw in etc, that would be silly but stopping it for deliberate time wasting could go a long way to combatting it. I agree in the main Marc, but the original question sugested that the timekeeper would stop the clock every time the ball was out of play. That is why I don't think it would be agreeable & the match would last at least two hours! Ah yes, it was the "like rugby" that I focussed on. Truth is, the clock doesn't stop in rugby every time the ball is out of play, that would be more akin to American football and we definitely don't want that!
|
|
|
Post by bristolpete on May 28, 2019 18:35:50 GMT
The suggestion along with taking timekeeping out of the hands of the ref was that the game would be 30 mins each way. That is, once you take out the time for free kicks, throw ins, goal celebrations etc, about how long is actually played now.
|
|
|
Play-offs
May 28, 2019 22:27:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by sharky on May 28, 2019 22:27:18 GMT
The suggestion along with taking timekeeping out of the hands of the ref was that the game would be 30 mins each way. That is, once you take out the time for free kicks, throw ins, goal celebrations etc, about how long is actually played now. That's what I remember too. In Aussie Rules a 20 min quarter of actual playing time runs for between 28 and 32 of actual time normally. It doesn't stop all time wasting but does reduce it substantially to a minor irritant. I think it's worthwhile considering
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on May 29, 2019 12:56:58 GMT
For me, I think time wasting should be based more on proper enforcement than changing the system to address the problem. The rules on time wasting are fairly straightforward but the lack of strictness from refs doesn't address how much of a negative impact it's currently having on the game because it's increasingly normalised.
Look at diving - the rules on simulation have always been pretty straight up and easy to understand, but due to outcry over how prevalent it's become, it's enforced in a harsher way and there's now retrospective punishment.
So with time wasting, I wouldn't want to see a change to how we time matches, I'd just like to see blatant timewasting handled in a proper way. Stop letting players get away with four warnings before issuing a pointless yellow for the fifth, for starters. Put a marker down. There's lots of precedent for refs taking a firmer stance on a rule - we saw it before with them warning teams pre-season a few seasons back about pushing and holding in the penalty box at set pieces. The rules exist, time wasting is becoming more culturally acceptable for loads of teams, so enforce them more rigorously across the board to bring it back in line.
Similarly to not liking VAR, a ref's degree of subjectivity is part of football for me - mistakes, disagreements and interpretation is in the fabric of the game (much as I hate it when we get a call wrong against us). Binary stuff like the ball crossing the line, where it can either be right or wrong, I'm glad the technology is there. But I'd rather have a ref interpret timewasting in a way I may sometimes disagree with than move over to rigid stop clocks etc.
|
|
|
Post by blatantfowl on May 29, 2019 16:00:53 GMT
|
|